Posts by Gareth. 86 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
So some bint from Intel says we should be replacing hardware after 4 years... is that because the quality control at Intel is so piss poor that their components are likely to fail after such a short timeframe?
What would be funny is if AMD used this in their marketing gumph... "Buy AMD's latest CPU - we won't tell you to replace it after only 4 years".
Don't care about the radio stations being culled... I've never listened to either of the ones cited in the article. Do they really have that big an audience...? I'm sure they could save even more money by ditching the annoying fat DJ who is on Radio 1 in the morning, and some of the other dinosaurs that are still on the payroll.
I'm more disappointed by the Beeb's online offerings being reduced. I've always liked what the BBC do online (not withstanding some of the turgid crap their journalists write - did you see the recent article about Photoshop being 20 years old?).
I don't mind paying my TV licence because I think, for the time being at least, it represents good value for money. Let's hope the quality of the Beeb's output doesn't decrease.
I couldn't use their website to upgrade my boradband to 50mbit so I gave them a call and did it over the phone... the sales person I spoke to told me it would cost £50-odd per month, which I questioned as I'd seen it at £38. He then backed down and said that they'd offer it to me for £38... something about goodwill as I was a long-standing customer.
Anyway, I didn't order it during that call but phoned them back another time, as I needed to check my or the wife's availability for the installation date, and when I called back the person I spoke to said that the upgrade would just cost me £38.... no mention of the £50-odd price the first guy had talked about.
Seems us punters aren't the only ones confused by Virgin Media's pricing strategy.
It could be the case that Windows 8 will be 64-bit only.... Windows 2008 R2 is available in a 64-bit version only. Maybe they'll do the same for Windows 8. I certainly wouldn't complain if they did.
I know MS love their backward compatibility, and there's undoubtedly some people at Redmond who would (correctly) argue that not every home user has a 64-bit capable CPU. However, since the minimum requirements for each Microsoft OS increase exponentially with each subsequent release, I doubt that Windows 8 would run on those old CPUs anyway.
Come on, Microsoft... bite the bullet and make Windows 8 truly revolutionary. Maybe then I'll use your products more than I currently do. As it is, at the moment, I find myself using OS X and Ubuntu more than I do Windows.
What I find more alarming than the number of patches being released is that there are several patches which replace previous hotfixes. I wonder whether the flaws were present in the original unpatched version of the code and went unnoticed when MS first patched it, or were these new vulnerabilities introduced as a result of the previously-released patches?
Also, I note that in the Microsoft announcements for each patch, they describe those vulnerabilities that were privately reported as being 'responsibly disclosed' - presumably anyone who goes public before the patch is released (not necessarily without having informed the vendor) is being irresponsible according to Microsoft.
Does anyone really believe that the Baddies out there are incapable of finding vulns themselves and that they all sit around waiting for Metasploit to release an exploit before targeting their victims? I seem to remember that Microsoft were aware of the IE6 Google Hack vulnerability 4 months prior to the rest of us (minus the Baddies) being aware of its existence.
"Even users running up-to-date anti-virus software still get infected with malware, according to stats from an online malware scanning service."
...according to stats from an online malware scanning service, eh? Of course, they don't have a vested interest in massaging figures to suggest their online malware scanning service is required by people browsing the web, even those with up-to-date AV software installed.
I'm not for any minute suggesting that AV is a panacea against malware, but I do question how impartial this research is.
Did they slip you a nice little backhander for publishing this 'article', El Reg? There's nothing like a free bit of advertising. World Cup tickets, anyone...?!?
What a rubbish petition... that's not to say that I don't think that the Govt should be upgrading to a different browser (cause frankly it is shit) but the reasoning is complete pish.
His petition states the following:
“IE6 has some security flaws that leave users vulnerable. These two governments have let their populations know that an upgrade will keep them safer online. We should follow them." I'd like to know what these security flaws are - is he suggesting that he knows of exploits in IE6 that Microsoft haven't fixed? If so, he should do the right thing and disclose the details (publically or privately, I don't really care) as IE6 is still supported by MS and I'm sure they'd like to know of these vulnerabilities so they can fix them.
Also, he states that:
“Most creative and software development companies are forced by government department clients to build websites for IE6 when most of the industry has moved on. Companies insist that they need IE6 support because government departments use it and won't be able to see their sites or services without it."
What a load of bollocks. Since when has the Government dictated anything to 'most creative and software development companies'..?
And this guy is simply delusional if he really thinks that because Gordy's IT department upgrade then the rest of Europe is gonna follow suit. We've not been a super power for donkey's years... despite what us Brits like to believe, nobody else looks to us to decide what they should be doing.
This whole thing is a marketing scam just so that he would get his company's name mentioned on BBC, El Reg, etc... Like 99.999% of IT workers, I'd never heard of them until today - and I've already forgotten what they're called so his plan hasn't worked really.
If these companies aren't going to reward those who report bugs to the relevant software vendors, then they really can't whinge and moan when people use public disclosure (I'm looking at you, Microsoft).
On the one hand, I'm glad that Google are doing this, and would like to see others follow suit, but when it's a security company that identifies the bugs I'm loathed to see them rewarded financially - after all, they use the information which they'll include in their security products, so they're benefitting already from knowing about the flaw and being able to protect their customers, which leads to some 'free' advertising and ultimately increased sales of their products.
In my opinion, private individuals should be rewarded but companies shouldn't be. That may be pretty unworkable but it's what I'd like to see.
This is just retaliation for the Yanks renaming French Fries to Freedom Fries after the Frenchies (quite rightly) suggested that Dubya was wrong to invade Iraq and wouldn't support his military actions.
I don't think it'll be necessary to have passengers walk through thin doorways or weigh themselves as there's a much simpler, quicker and more effective method... they'll just get the check in staff to look for anyone with an American passport.
Only if that gaunt smoke smelling cheese eating surrender monkey is also entitled to get their money back for having had to share their personal space with Burberry-wearing, intellectually-challenged, Jeremy Kyle-watching, fish and chips eating twat (possibly like yourself...?).
As I'm not English, would I be entitled to get twice my fare refunded if I had to sit in between an English person and a French person? Although given the choice I'd always prefer to sit next to the Frenchie than an English person.
Every day when I wake up I thank the Lord I'm Welsh
Why should we believe you when you got it so so wrong the first time round (in your defence at least you're prepared to admit it... although frankly it'd be hard to ignore it).
Why, though, did you get the job of writing this article instead of someone else? If I fucked up quite so majestically in my job as you did when you wrote your original article, then I'd not be given a 2nd chance.
If you say that the Google Phone will be a hit then Google must be shitting themselves right about now at just how much money they've poured into something that'll flop.
What's that? A concert by Sugababes, Backstreet Boys, Lady Gaga and Janet Jackson, you say? Yeah, I guess I can see what that's got to do with an operating system... well, actually, maybe I can't.
Didn't the Rookies from Redmo.... er, Reading think about their target audience when signing all those cheques? Let's give them a few pointers.....
Crap pop stars' target audience == pre-pubescant girls who live at home with their parents and who spend all their time in their bedroom reading MyFaceSpace blogs about their idols (Sugababes, Backstreet Boys, Lady Gaga and Janet Jackson).
Crap operating system's target audience == fat, balding, middle-aged men who live at home with their parents and who spend all their time in their bedroom reading MyFaceSpace blogs about their idols (Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer and Ray Ozzie).
Maybe they've got more in common with each other than I originally thought.
Eh...? The operating system you use is irrelevant. Even Mac users have access to software that enables them to download from bit torrent sites (Transmission is an example, and even µTorrent has been ported to Mac now).
The packets whizzing across the network are still going to be intercepted, irrespective of whether they originated from or are destined for a Mac. This is all being done at the network level, it's not a client that Vermin Media are going to ask you to install on your Windows PC.
Personally, I think this approach is short-sighted. It will just speed up the adoption of encrypted file sharing, which no ISP will be able to examine - they may be able to see where your traffic is coming from & going to, and therefore assume that any encrypted traffic seen immediately after you've searched the Pirate Bay's website is going to be a DVD5 copy of the latest Hollywood blockbuster. But we all know what happens when you assume something ;o)
@ Law,
Nice posts... and I completely agree with what you're saying. Microsoft should only be preventing those customers who have modded their consoles from using XBox Live, not bricking the machine. Otherwise, they should have been much more upfront from the beginning that if they detect a modded console they will cause it to be unuseable.
@AC At the end of the day (and one that is cold and harsh here) ,
If the T&Cs that these people have broken don't talk about what the ramifications are then surely you cna understand why they're pissed off? The T&Cs should have stated that not only will you be banned from XBox Live, but your console will become a very big and incredibly ugly looking paperweight.
FWIW, I've not modded my XBox 360 so this wave of accounts being banned doesn't concern me, however, as a consumer I'm regularly being shafted by Microsoft.
...can we add wireless NICs to the list too?
How can Microsoft justify charging £50 for a wireless NIC when you can buy an equivalent for about a tenner? Oh, that's right... the XBox software only allows you to connect their wireless NIC and not anybody else's - that's why Microsoft charge such an exhorbitant price for it, because they've got their customers well and truly over a barrel with their y-fronts round their ankles.
"So, you wanna not have to leave a Cat5 cable trailing across your living room...? That'll be fifty of your finest British pounds then!"
I'm sure that if they could find a way to only run the damn consoles using electricity supplied by EDF then they'd be implementing this too. Bastards... I hope Datel win - that'd be a victory for the consumer!
Datel should've taken them to court in Brussels though... I'm not sure an American court will really favour a British company over one of their own.
"Details of the measures - welcomed today by rights holder organisations including the BPI and the Federation Against Software Theft - are expected on Friday..."
Why is F.A.S.T actually called F.A.S.T? I’m sure they are fully aware that under English law theft occurs when someone “dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it” (Theft Act 1968). Surely those miscreants who participate in file sharing are, by the very virtue of their name, sharing files amongst themselves. Whilst this is reprehensible, it doesn’t permanently deprive anyone else of the ability to buy the software.
A shoplifter who takes, for example, a diamond necklace from a jewellery shop is clearly a thief as I can no longer buy that necklace and the jeweller is deprived the revenue he would have otherwise realised from selling it. Someone who is copying software, however, is not a thief because they are merely duplicating the software and are, instead, only infringing on someone’s copyright. Therefore, I propose they should consider renaming their organisation the Federation Against Software Copyright Infringement Supporting Terrorists – or F.A.S.C.I.S.T. (I actually made up the part about supporting terrorists but I’m sure they would approve of this as it could bolster their raison d’être).
They might have been peddling chemicals that someone could use to produce crystal meth, but they weren't breaking the law in the UK, where they were based and operating from.
The Americans should go after their citizens who were buying the chemicals - they were breaking their country's laws and they were based there too. That would involve admitting that their citizens did wrong, however (much like the Pentagon's and NASA's employees doing wrong by not bothering with passwords or having easily guessed passwords).
It appears that America would rather blame others instead of accepting when they've fucked up. Much easier to avoid looking silly by doing that.
I wonder if they'll try to extradite me for thinking negative thoughts against their great country?
Zoiks, their site really says, " You'll also need to install the programs and data that you want to use" - does that mean that installing a non-expired version of Windows over the top of an expired version has to be a complete re-install?
Can't you just change the serial from the RC to the full blown thing without needing to reinstall the damn thing? My OS doesn't bother with serial numbers, so it's a very bizarre concept for me to need a valid serial before I can use an OS.
If you do have to reinstall, does Windows not allow you to put /home on a different partition so reinstalling applications after a reinstall of the OS is a piece of cake?
Can someone remind me again why people still use Windows?
With Sony announcing a slimmed down version of the PS3 at almost the same price Microsoft charge for an Ultimate Dogs' Bollocks edition of their OS, I don't get why gamers stick with Windows.
Same can be said for Microsoft's upgrade deals - can I use it to downgrade... er, sorry I mean upgrade from Ubuntu 9.04 to Windows 7 (although I fail to understand quite why anyone would want to do that unless they're a gamer... in which case they should buy a PS3!)...?
I know that technically it can be hacked to work like that - install an upgrade version without actually activating it and then re-install Windows 7 on top of the unactivated Windows 7 - but that's against Microsoft's EULA. Microsoft's EULA is so damn restrictive. I much prefer the freedom offered by the GPL :o)
Just saw that the Premium edition is available for £80 at ebuyer - www.ebuyer.com/product/168375
As a Linux user, it's £80 more than I will pay for an OS (and my OS is better than Windows 7 and it's available right now!).
But, for anyone that has to get their fix of Microsoft's software, then £80 seems to be a good price for it.
Hehehe, Aaron Kempf is an anagram of Prank Me Oaf..... from his comments, he sounds like a fucking stupid oaf. The most stupider of stupid oafs on the interweb, quite possibly.
I think El Reg should start selling Aaron Kempf t-shirts, proclaiming, "the Databases are Coming, the Databases are Coming!!!" or "Databases Never Hurt Nobody" (does that double-negative mean that they did hurt somebody if they didn't 'hurt nobody'...?).
This time next year, Rodney, we'll be millionaires!
I really couldn't care less about promotions of unknown people within Microsoft... what impact does this have on my daily life? Answer == none!
My desktop PC runs Linux, my media centre runs OS X and my games consoles run Nintendo's and Sony's software. I clearly don't give a fuck about Microsoft's employees. But do Windows (l)users really care either?
I'm more interested to know who is gonna be evicted from Big Brother than I am about promotions within Microsoft..... and I fucking well hate Big Brother!
You said, "Would you expect a car manufacturer to retro-fit better locks to your car five years after you bought it because someone worked out how to pick the old ones?"
I say, "Would you not expect a car manufacturer to issue a recall if an old model was found to be inherently defective or would you be happy for them to tell you that you need to buy a new model?"
Actually I do kinda agree with what you're saying... there's no reason why MS shouldn't provide better products and charge for them accordingly - provided they also fix security issues with the older products and don't just use that as an excuse to force people to upgrade.
Contrary to the person you replied to, I think that MS will eventually provide a hotfix for this issue - their workaround is just a temporary fix until it's been tested. I don't think they would honestly expect to get away with leaving this unfixed on supported OSes such as XP.
I'm not sure, however, how long it will take them to do it. Whilst he was still at the helm, Gates seemed to have been pushing through changes to decrease the Vulnerability Window by making security fixes available sooner. But since he stepped down, there generally seems to be less priority placed on getting the hotfixes out quickly (with the exception of the 2 out-of-band patches released earlier this year).
Tux - because I wish I could download the source code and build my own car for free like I do with Linux.
There's a post over at /. that talks about how these clean up costs should be factored into the TCO of using Windows but never are.
It's definitely something that Microsoft don't include in their figures when they spout their bullshit about Windows-based environments being cheaper to build, run and support than an equivalent *nix environment.
Whilst some of the Mancs' costs aren't directly attributed to IT, e.g. compensation for late payments, they simply wouldn't have been necessary at all if they didn't use Microsoft's OS.
Sure, you can say that the costs would have been avoided if the Windows administrators had done their job properly and had secured their network, but that's the trouble with Windows sysadmins... they're two-a-penny, and you get what you pay for. People whose only experience of computing is to run a Windows PC at home consider themselves to be Windows sysadmins. There's a reason why these people are comparatively cheaper than their *nix counterparts - because *nix guys tend to know what they're doing, and have the required skills and experience to do the job properly.
Gotta agree with Steve - using Joost was akin to using Real Player in the mid-to-late 90's. Buffer... buffer... buffer... buffer.... And that was with a 10Mbit cable connection with NTL.
Add to this the fact that their content library is abysmal and always has been.
At a time when YouTube showed what could be done (still some buffering but nowhere near as bad as Joost, and plenty of varied - albeit unlicensed - content even if it was limited to 10 mins duration) Joost was a painful experience no matter which way you looked at it.
I remember there being a big hoo-ha about the Skype & Kazaa founders being behind Joost.... just goes to show that in cyberspace nobody gives a flying fuck what your past achievements were.
I, for one, won't be sad to see Joost finally go tits up.
Right, some of you twats obvisouly just looked at the homepage of each site and decided to form your judgement on that. If you're basing your decision on just the homepage, then the similarities are slight.
What you should have done, however, is to perform a search and then look at the results page. Here you'll see the similarities are much more prominent.
As that was obviously too hard for you (supposed IT professionals) to do, I've done it for you and uploaded a screenshot to one of the few imagehosting sites that's not blocked at my place of work...
http://www.hostanyimage.com/files/v58edj83g07e64y0ruhz.jpg
Now do you see why Kayak are so pissed off? It's not just the same orange-coloured button on a white background any more, is it, you dumb fucks?
ps - Hats off to Kayak for not assuming I'm gonna buy plane tickets in US dollars.... ffs, the whole world does not revolve around the United States of Dumbass America!
pps - can you guess where I want to go on my hols...? ;-)
If you look at the bottom of both pictures you can clearly see the portal that is obviously being used to transport between dimensions. I just hope they don't cause a shift in the time-space continuum (I've got no idea what that means, by the way, but Dr Who said it once and it sounded impressive).
"While I don't understand what reason there is for blocking it, I do think they're making the right move in blocking the companies from doing it."
Why do you think they're making the right move if you don't know why they're doing it?
I don't know why they're doing it either (I'm cynically guessing it has something to do with them a) backtracking and generously giving users this facility at a later date; or b) desperate to get some free advertising) so until the truth comes out, I won't say that I think they're doing the right thing. As things stand, I can see this resulting in considerable negative publicity which is the last thing that Microsoft needs in light of how badly they're seen by "average people" over the whole Vista debacle.
If people actually gave Linux a go, it would be the outright winner in this OS race... what do you really need Windows for when using a netbook?
"We have had some very good initial response [about Bing]," Ballmer said. "I don't want to over-set expectations. We are going to have to be tenacious and keep up the pace of innovation over a long period of time."
Microsoft are lots of things... but innovative isn't one of them.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
